Gray

Gray v. Bekins

Good Law
186 Cal. 389·1921 Cal. LEXIS 458·199 P. 767
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 29, 1921S. F. No. 7637.California3,150 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lennon, J.

The partial destruction of an unfinished building by an earthquake on April 18, 1906, engendered the controversy which culminated in the present action. Plaintiffs had constructed the first and second stories of a six-story brick and concrete warehouse, which they had contracted to build for defendants, when the portions erected were damaged by earthquake on the date above mentioned. When plaintiff H. N. Gray, defendant Martin Bekins, the architect, and brick contractor met at the building a few; weeks after the earthquake and examined the structure to ascertain the damages, it was decided that some repairing was necessary. .The exact amount of repairing was not determined, but there is testimony that it was decided that, before any further work was performed by plaintiffs, the building inspector of the board of public works of San Francisco should pass upon the extent of repairing to be done so that any subsequent controversy with the board might be avoided.

Plaintiff H. N. Gray testified that it was agreed that, before plaintiffs proceeded with the work, the examination by the building inspector should be procured by defendants and that the latter should inform plaintiffs of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.